Misleading statements made by a computer games publisher

[Darkspire]

I think he was just trying to start a discussion, its not the first post, its the second one, first one he is thanking someone for an AAR. Think he just wanted to make an impression and get some feedback on the subject from the folks on here is all.

Darkspire

[bayonetbrant]

I agree that it's an aggressive first post, and probably bad form to open up with something that's easily interpreted as an attack on a company, even if if it's not intended that way.

Better manners might have been starting with a "hi, I'm Anima and I dig gaming" in the "Welcome" forum or something similar.  Talk about what you enjoy, what you play, what's coming up that you're looking forward to.  Then go nuts banging into the big boys with you 'business' analysis.

Just noting some options for easing into the pool from the stairs instead of a cannonball into the deep end where the regulars are chilling with a beer and having a chat...

[Herman Hum]

I also had a good chuckle at the claims made by a private company about results that cannot be confirmed.  If they are so rosy, put out some numbers that can be independently verified.  Right up until the day Matrix got themselves bought by Slitherine, the news was always, "We're doing well and have big future plans." 

In my personal experience, the businesses that make the biggest boasts are the ones that often end up closing shop in the very near future.  :D

[LongBlade]

It's an interesting observation that the three years of meteoric growth may have been spurred by acquisition.

I don't know if that's the case, though.

Slitherine bought Matrix, so I'm not sure how Slitherine got all its capital if it was so much smaller.

So maybe it's true, but if so where did all the money come from?

[LongBlade]

In my personal experience, the businesses that make the biggest boasts are the ones that often end up closing shop in the very near future.  :D

Heh. Matrix was doing well before the buyout.

After? They still seem to be doing well, but most of the core people have moved on.

So the name lives on, but has the brand changed? Remained the same? Improved? Only consumers can answer that question.

[GDS_Starfury]

So maybe it's true, but if so where did all the money come from?

[hurryover]

Now that the conversation is derailed... I guess I'll jump in.

I think it's possible. But I'm more concerned to as what LongBlade is saying. The company is different than it was prior to the merger because the characters of the play have changed. I think Erik Rutins is the only one still hanging around from the old days?

Not sure if this is a good or a bad thing, but time will tell all. All I know is that I enjoy the older Matrix releases more than I do the more recent ones.

[GDS_Starfury]

is it an interestiong question?  maybe.
does it belong here?  not at all.
if youre a professional financial adviser or whatever why ask a bunch of gamers? 
a professional either already has the source material in hand or they go to company and ask questions in a professional manner to that company's accounting department.  if said company is publicly traded then any financial information can be found elsewhere much easier.
I realize that there are some idiots out there that think people here control the puppet strings but really....
except for a few Mossad and one possible ex-GSG-9 member we're a happy go lucky bunch.   ;)

[Herman Hum]

if youre a professional financial adviser or whatever why ask a bunch of gamers? 
a professional either already has the source material in hand or they go to company and ask questions in a professional manner to that company's accounting department.  if said company is publicly traded then any financial information can be found elsewhere much easier.

Bingo.

Regardless, the only decision customers get to make is whether or not to purchase the games, not the company.  If Slitherine wants to try and justify its 'full price' strategy to potential investors, that is their business even if I might find it laughable.  They can stay a big fish in a tiny pond and leave the deep waters to Ubisoft and others.

[hurryover]

Its not that uncomom for businesses to stretch the truth a bit, or even not tell their customers what they don't want them to hear. But I pay attention to other signs that suggest if Slitherine is doing that well or not. I personally don't think they are having as much success as they are claiming.
I prefer to look at these things through other avenues, like their actions and appearance. Merging can be seen as a form of weakness, merging with a competitor to eliminate costly competition. The game installers are the same old installers of the last decade, the box sets are the same, the websites never get updated with better software and they don't seem to be expanding their personnel or hiring any better qualified people for marketing. Certain places of the Matrix website haven't been updated for years (like the Corporate section). Even the AGEOD store was just a Matrix Games website clone. So then I can only assume two things:

1) They are having as much success as they claim, but they are investing little of that back into the company (which is often a huge mistake).
2) They are not having as much success as they claim.

[Herman Hum]

I prefer to look at these things through other avenues, like their actions and appearance. Merging can be seen as a form of weakness, merging with a competitor to eliminate costly competition. The game installers are the same old installers of the last decade, the box sets are the same, the websites never get updated with better software and they don't seem to be expanding their personnel or hiring any better qualified people for marketing. Certain places of the Matrix website haven't been updated for years (like the Corporate section). Even the AGEOD store was just a Matrix Games website clone. So then I can only assume two things:

1) They are having as much success as they claim, but they are investing little of that back into the company (which is often a huge mistake).
2) They are not having as much success as they claim.

I can agree with much of what you claim because it can be supported by other publicly available information.  However, they have done a few recruitment drives.  One about 01/01/2012 and the latest in June 2013:

Job Opening @ Slitherine
http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=6277.msg152408#msg152408

This data is contradictory to your hypothesis.

[Martok]

I pretty much second what most others here have been saying so far.  Unless I'm a stockholder in the Slitherine Group, it doesn't particularly matter what they claim is driving their profit. 

If they're making good games that I feel are worth the money to purchase them, I will.  As a gamer, that's what I most care about.  :) 

I think he was just trying to start a discussion, its not the first post, its the second one, first one he is thanking someone for an AAR. Think he just wanted to make an impression and get some feedback on the subject from the folks on here is all.

Darkspire

Actually Darkspire, the OP *is* Anima's first post.  His post count was only at 1 when I first viewed this thread. 

Also, a member's posts are listed in reverse order, so that the post at the bottom of a member's post list is always the oldest one viewable; you can look at each posts' time stamp to verify this.  If you go back and check, you'll see the OP is indeed Anima's first post (not his second). 

[hurryover]

I prefer to look at these things through other avenues, like their actions and appearance. Merging can be seen as a form of weakness, merging with a competitor to eliminate costly competition. The game installers are the same old installers of the last decade, the box sets are the same, the websites never get updated with better software and they don't seem to be expanding their personnel or hiring any better qualified people for marketing. Certain places of the Matrix website haven't been updated for years (like the Corporate section). Even the AGEOD store was just a Matrix Games website clone. So then I can only assume two things:

1) They are having as much success as they claim, but they are investing little of that back into the company (which is often a huge mistake).
2) They are not having as much success as they claim.

I can agree with much of what you claim because it can be supported by other publicly available information.  However, they have done a few recruitment drives.  One about 01/01/2012 and the latest in June 2013:

Job Opening @ Slitherine
http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=6277.msg152408#msg152408

This data is contradictory to your hypothesis.

What you say is true. Perhaps I jumped the gun a bit.

I know that they would be required to hire a few bodies for their acquisitions to make up for the AGEOD expansion. But they are probably also hiring to fill vacancies too. There is a turn-over it seems.

But why are they not addressing the other aspects I mentioned if everything is so grand?

[Steelgrave]

A bigger question might be....why do you care? Are you a stockholder? Do you have some personal grudge against the company? This type of "analysis" of a gaming company is odd, imho. We're customers. We buy their products or we don't. They're hardly defrauding homeowners like the big banks or playing the Wall Street game. How many companies are 100% honest about how they are doing? You think that McDonalds has any actual idea of how many burgers they've sold, or does "billions and billions sold" just have a nice ring to it?

Lots of smoke here but no fire that I can see.

[Huw the Poo]

I can agree with much of what you claim because it can be supported by other publicly available information.  However, they have done a few recruitment drives.  One about 01/01/2012 and the latest in June 2013:

Job Opening @ Slitherine
http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=6277.msg152408#msg152408

This data is contradictory to your hypothesis.

Might they not have just been replacing people who left?